>>33706626Alright nigga, sit down.
Don't tell me "you might not have learned this shit in school" because I lacked enough sense to get a degree in this shit, and I damn sure know what the fuck is going on here. I'm talking about two things: your prose is convoluted enough to make me think that you actually did fuck up your tenses more than you did, and two, that random as fuck use of "historical present" is, to repeat myself: fucking random and fucking pretentious.
Second, concerning your assertion that there were no major grammatical errors: if your entire bloody text reads choppier than Drake's fucking Passage then you've committed a grammatical error known as being awkward as fuck. Choppy text is bad text unless it gets used to illustrate very specific points for very specific lengths of time, not two thousand bloody words.
Thirdly: don't pull this false dichotomy bullshit about my point concerning no introductions and showing over telling. Ee4ee explained it perfectly. Reread it but in an angrier voice.
Finally: "I'll accept valid criticism." No, you won't. Because I can tell exactly the kind of person you are in the way you respond to critique. No matter how valid my criticism is, something about it is going to offend you grand vision and send you off on making excuses. And that's all I've seen out of your responses. Excuses.
"It won't get interesting until I introduce the antagonists." You get one first impression. You wasted it.
Image courtesy UVA.
